Islam (الإِسْلاَمُ) is a stated ambition to Islamise all others into the influence of [the] Shari’ah (شريعة).

Islam (الإِسْلاَمُ) is a stated ambition to Islamise all others into the influence of [the] Shari’ah (شريعة).

Islam & Civilisation

The Meccan period of Islam began with Muhammed’s Hira Cave experience and the start of the recitation of the Qur’an (literally the spoken Qur’an). In this period Muhammed was mostly rejected, and in thirteen years he succeeded in converting approximately 150 people to the belief that God is One, and that he (Muhammed) was God’s Prophet (Dr Bill Warner). This is the start of Greater Jihad.

He was rejected because he could not substantiate his claims with prophetic evidence to the satisfaction of his hearers. Some of his followers from this period left Mecca on Muhammed’s advice. They went to Abyssinia (Ethiopia) and found protection from the Ethiopian Christians. Eventually, Muhammed felt compelled to flee Mecca with the remainder of his followers. By an agreement made in 622 CE (the first pledge at al-Aqabah), and then again in 623 CE (the second pledge at al-Aqabah), Muhammed migrated to Medina and established himself as a Juridic arbiter in Medinan public life. This is called the Hijra of Muhammed. This is the start of Lesser Jihad.

In Medina, Muhammed was quickly rejected by the Jews who saw through his corrupted account of the Jewish prophetic line, as forming part of Islam. From Medina, Muhammed began to attack merchant traders in order to steal their goods – and by that means he was able to finance Jihad. He sanctioned slavery and benefitted from trading in slaves and captives. He imposed various taxes on the wealth of Muslims (Zakat al-mal & Zakat al-fitr) as well as Kafir’s (Jizya). This is the beginning of Political Islam as well as the start of the Shari’ah. It is likely that Muhammed’s Hijra to Medina coincided with two events. The first was a direct threat of assassination in Mecca – the second was an opportunity to take a leading role in the life of Medina – agreed beforehand with the Arabs, both polytheists and Muslims as well as the Jews – in what has been called the second pledge at al-Aqabah. The relevant clauses being altogether fifteen in number in which the Jews were politically included. Within five years the Jewish tribes were expelled and suffered terrible financial loss, and the third tribe was annihilated, through decapitation, sexual slavery and forced assimilation into Islam.

Islamic Shari’ah derives from Muhammed’s life.

The character of Muhammed’s message, in Mecca, as a self-proclaimed Messenger of God was mainly peaceful, with theological claims warning that rejection of either himself or his message, would incur Allah’s punishment. Whereas in Medina, Muhammed’s message came to form threats of subjugation, followed by violent subjugation. Having rejected Muhammed, the Jewish tribes were the party that provided the substance, in both body and soul for Muhammed’s ultimate prophetic career – and thus the destruction of the Jews formed the essential character of Islamic Jihad. In spirit, Islam is today what it was in its beginning. Muhammed’s experience of rejection by the Meccan Arabs as well as the Medinan Jews – along with his response, can be claimed by Juridic authorities as Jihad.

Islamic Jihad

Inner struggle– Muhammed’s struggle to convince others that he was the Prophet of God – Greater Jihad– reason – persuasion – personal rejection – ending in the Hijra. Greater Jihad is presented to western minds as inner purity – and denotes a sense of one’s personal struggle inwardly to conform to Islamic ideals and ordinances.

Outer struggle– Muhammed’s physical struggle to implement Islam – Lesser Jihad– political demands – war – subjugation – culminating in the Hajj. Lesser Jihad is presented as Noble – and means all that which promotes the implementation of Islamic Rule regardless of its moral character.

Jihad is both Theological and Political Islam – which together form the Shari’ah (شريعة) Surah 45:18 of Islam (الإِسْلاَمُ) Surah 5:3.

It is essential to realise that Islam, as a religious expression, and Shari’ah similarly, cannot be precisely separated from the term Jihad.

Islam has these two extremes visible today through numerous Islamic Madhhab or Juridic Schools of thought and interpretation. For the purposes of this article, however, I am presenting things in a somewhat focused way in order to avoid endless divisions and confusions that easily arise when seeking to assert a supposed Islamic meaning. My emphasis is on the life of Muhammed and not juridic theology as such, therefore whilst I am emphasising a broad prophetic implication based on the life of Muhammed, as defined in the Sunna – evidenced theologically in the Qur’an itself – I am essentially concerned with drawing out the political implications of Muhammed’s life and not juridic, or for that matter, specific theological implications.

Given Muhammed’s claim to be the Messenger of God, and the Seal of the Prophetic revelation of God – it is impossible to disregard theological ideas altogether. From a political perspective, we need to know what Islam means to the Kafir or unbeliever. It is that reality which essentially ties Shari’ah into the political life of the host nation because Shari’ah covers every aspect of life – not only of the Muslim – but significantly of the Kafir as well.

Islam is many Juridic schools and traditions. Sunni Islam is by far the largest Sect within Islam. What is common across all Islamic schools and most sects is the Qur’an and Sira – a’Hadith can vary – and perhaps only Sahih al’Bukhari is overwhelmingly accepted by Islam as authentic in any monolithic sense. As a result, Shari’ah expresses variations, and at the same time unifies at the point of Qur’an, Sira and Bukhari (Hadith) as the authoritative source text. Together they form the textual evidence for Islam – grounded in the activity of Muhammed’s own life. It is the Sunna (Sira and a’Hadith) that forms the bulk of evidence as to what manner of man Muhammed was in real life.

The Qur’an admonishes Muslims repeatedly to emulate and agree with Muhammed’s personal life as the example of what it means to be a good Muslim. Therefore, we cannot but comprehend Islam, as proven by Muhammed himself. When we do that, it becomes very clear that Islam is a civilisational assassin and a political terror. In the western world today, as in the Classical World of Muhammed’s day, Islam has only one true ambition and outcome – that ambition and outcome are the Islamisation of life itself.

Stated in a more specific theological ambition, we can say that Muhammed replaces Christ, Islam replaces Israel – And the Ummah replaces the body of Christ

Most of Islam is in the middle ground of Sunni and Shia Islam where the principle of Muhammed’s requirement to be acknowledged as the Messenger of God by all humanity is held in a broad theological meaning and does not transgress into Messianic heresies. It is a characteristically theological imperative on others to recognise Islam as an Abrahamic Faith – where Muhammed is seen in a Judaeo prophetic office – in the line of Abraham, Jacob, Moses and Jesus (24 + Muhammed). It is an epigraphical continuation of the work of God – now expressed in a final protected tablet – delivered through Muhammed, in recitation (Prophetic Speech), called Qur’an. This includes Muhammed’s life in Mecca – the Hijra to Medina in a state of rejection. Muhammed’s life in Medina as a triumphant man – the Hajj to Mecca in a state of triumph – where the Kaaba of the Polytheists is overthrown, and Islam is installed.

It would be a mistake to imagine that the Hijra of Muhammed is evidence of Islamic peace. Whilst the Hijra of Muhammed, is reflective of the pain of the Greater Struggle of Muhammed, in Mecca – that rejection justified the brutality of the Lesser Struggle of Muhammed, in Medina – with its subjugation of those who rejected the prophet of Islam – and thus the will of God. The Hijra of Muhammed represents a spiritual hope, as well as a political opportunity. The Political opportunity is represented in the pledge made at al-Aqabah in 622 CE and 623 CE, resulting in Muhammed gaining a political influence through which to press his supposed spiritual claims, by political means. The spiritual hope is evidenced by Muhammed’s Hajj to Mecca, through the perfecting of Islamic terror, called Lesser Jihad, and the continued subjugation of peoples to Islam.

The vocative evidence for Islamic belief is the confession of faith (Shahada) – there is no god but God. Muhammed is the messenger of God – as well as the recitation of Qur’an. The most potent physical symbol, from an Islamic doctrinal position, is bowing down in the genuflect. In Islam all the angels were previously required to bow down to Adam before his disobedience – only Iblis (Satan) refused. Therefore whosoever refuses to bow down and worship Allah, in an opportunity to embrace Islam – becomes Satan. Through Muhammed, Greater Jihad gives way to Lesser Jihad, and all resistance, be that doctrinally or politically, is of itself the evidence of Satan.

Today, where Salafi Juridic Purism and broad Sunni Islam, find their agreement, then those essential religious meanings begin to press into hostile political implications, regardless of a claim that Islam is the religion of Peace. The Lesser Jihad of Political Islam is provoked through religious idealism, when those tensions begin to take on something of an identification with Muhammed’s own life in Mecca before the Hijra, and thus inspire a Hajj like desire to return to Islamic Ideals. Those Islamic ideals are presented and held to by many, as peaceful, and therefore irresistible. In this way, Greater Jihad, with its seeming peaceful ambitions, becomes Lesser Jihad, with its ambition to implement the Shari’ah on all men. In the end, Hijra becomes Hajj. Inner struggle and religious belief, become Outer struggle with its physical subjugation.

It is this distinction between Muhammed’s life in Mecca, ending in the Hijra – and Muhammed’s life in Medina, culminating in the Hajj – that characterises how Islam can claim to be a religion of peace and cite Qur’anic verses to support that claim. Accepting Greater Jihad as the evidence of Islam is to reject the last ten years of Muhammed’s life and to remove the meaning of the Hajj. It is to ignore the Jihad of physical submission of others to Islam, both Lesser and Greater Jihad – whether by the conquest of war, the threat of war or else treaty of subjugation – to Dihmi Status and Tax burdens.

Political Naiveté and Kafir Ignorance

Political correctness attempts to give the impression that supposed extremism in Islam is a modern day problem, and that Islamic peace and tolerance is the ancient path of Muhammed. That is simply not the case – other than in the narrow sense regarding his time in Mecca. Such a claim has the effect of disguising that the whole character of Islam is an extreme political creed. When Muhammed sought to convince the Arabs that he was the Messenger of God, he attracted just fifteen followers per year on average. As a religious endeavour, Islam failed. Its success only occurred when it became suppressive and violent. That suppression and violence are all grounded and visible in Muhammed’s own life. That they have characterised Islam ever since is all the evidence we need, to know that Islam is Muhammed and Muhammed is Islam. To say otherwise is irrational and false.

In Mecca, Islam was a rejected Prophet (Muhammed) and perhaps 150 men women and children embracing the ‘Religion of Peace.’ In Medina, very nearly every tribe and person in the Arabian Peninsula became subject to Muhammed by the time of his death through violent Jihad and direct physical subjugation. Whether that meant becoming a Muslim or else living under Kafir status, was to some extent a matter of choice – if you can overlook the oppressive demand in the first place. That demand is the Shari’ah – The recitation of Muhammed (Qur’an), the canonical biography of Muhammed and the Hadith.

We can pretend that somehow Islam is peaceful, but the reality is that Islam has proven itself over the last 1400 years to be a radical political system of subjugation.

The opposite argument which some make is to characterise Islam as a slowly reforming religion. This too is to wilfully ignore that in the last 300 years Islam has reformed in response to political and theological needs and opportunities. These reforms are Wahhabi, Salafi and Heretical Ahmadi.

The current claim to the Reformation of Islam, or else a return to a more pure Islam, is to imply that Islam is abandoning Medina, and embracing Mecca. If it does that – Islam will find that the Mecca of Muhammed has become the Medina of Islamic fundamentalism through Wahhabism – outwith Islamic State Caliphate is a literal physical Medina and a Salafi’s puristic rationale. On that basis, we can destroy Islamic State and of necessity embrace strict Shari’ah. In short, to receive any part of Islam into national life would mean Wahhabism or else it would mean Islamic State Caliphate. No Imam anywhere could prevent that from happening. That is why we have to reject Islam altogether and make certain that it does not find ascendancy in the UK.

Mecca and Medina represent the two aspects of Muhammed’s own example – expressed ideologically today as Salafi purism and Wahhabi fundamentalism, on one extreme, and Sufi and Ahmadi Heresy on the other.

Wahhabism & Salafism

Islamic State Caliphate is a literal Islam both ideologically and politically, and as such is the perfect reflection of the Islam of Muhammed worked out in Medina – than any attempt to regain the idealism of Mecca in Muhammed’s life could possibly represent. It is almost as though theological Salafism (rationalism) with its puristic creed thwarted any possibility of Islam becoming a true religion of peace due to its capacity to inform Wahhabi fundamentalism. Salafism served as a provocation which in time has informed Islamic State Caliphate with its unified Islamic practise of theological purity and strict physical Jihad.

Even though Wahhabism is consequent on Salafi Purism, Wahhabism informs a more Strict literal Political Islam through Salafi Rationalism. Together they perfectly represent the reality of Muhammed’s own life and experience as the Messenger of Allah and the evidence – in his own body – that Islam is Muhammed and Muhammed is Islam. In short – Islam is a religion of terror in the same manner that Muhammed was a terror from the moment he was able to exert real political influence – beginning in Medina and the implementation of the second pledge at al-Aqabah.

Sufi & Ahmadi Heresy

Sufism with its experiential theology of knowing Muhammed mystically gives the claim that Islam is a religion of peace some traction. There is no possibility of making it acceptable however unless you can remove the chronological Medinan passages and more than two-thirds of the Sira. It is characteristically physical Jihad that forms the biographical literature of Muhammed (Sira). How can that be removed without removing Muhammed himself? There is no possibility whatsoever that Islam can become a Religion of peace as long as it reflects Muhammed’s own life. To remove Muhammed from Islam is self-evidently absurd and blasphemous to Islam. It would render Muhammed into a fictional character or else press [the] Kalām into a mystical heresy. It is for this reason that Sufism is broadly heretical in Islam.

Ahmadi Heresy, though it is necessarily heretical to Islam, proves the meaning of Isa al’Masih (Jesus the Messiah) in Islam. Ahmadi Islam makes of a man by the name of Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad – in British India in the late 19th Century – a claim to be Isa al’Masih. The reason why this is heretical is not because he agrees with the idea that Jesus was a mere prophet, by claiming to be that returned Messiah (Isa al’Mahdi) – but rather that in doing so he denies Muhammed as the Seal of the Prophets. Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad also did that which was unthinkable to Islam. He proclaimed peace and renounced the Lesser Jihad of physical oppression and violence which so characterised Muhammed’s life.

Wahhabism and Ahmadi beliefs are so clearly defined that they effectively form Islamic Sects. Sufism may not be a strict sect when it conforms to its ambition to uncover mystical insights into Muhammed – and may just as well be called Sunni Islam or Shia Islam equally. It is Sufism that mystically converts Muhammed into a personality that is so like the language that Christians use for Christ in invocation, that Sufism inadvertently discloses Muhammed’s real effect. In that sense, Islam at its core only incorporates a claim to encompass Christ, as a mechanism to deceive Christians. Mystical Sufism makes of Christ a prophet to be loved and held in respect, in keeping with Islam itself, but it is Muhammed who is said to influence from the grave – in defiance of Muhammed who forbade any form of mystical approbation.

With the exception of Ahmadi Messianic heresy, Sufism, Salafism and Wahhabism can all be found in broad Sunni Islam across any number of Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. Islam itself is not monolithic and therefore is incapable of self-engineering a more forceful reason to seemingly undress supposed Islamic extremism than to claim that Muhammed was a prophet of peace and that Islam is a religion of peace. To make that claim meaningful and believable, Islam would need to remove significant portions of the Sira, a large part of a’Hadith literature and separate the Qur’an into its real division of Meccan and Medinan theological and political realities – and then throw the Medinan Qur’an, two-thirds of the Sira and much of a’Hadith away. Islam cannot do that in any part. It would mean abrogating Muhammed to a fictional character. Whereas, Muhammed practised Lesser Jihad – a fact proven from Islamic sources.

Muhammed came to view Islam as a necessary physical suppression of others. It is reflective of the rejection he received at the hands of the polytheists in Mecca and thereafter the Jews in Medina. It is Greater Jihad (Inner struggle) with Lesser Jihad (Outer struggle) following on. We have to know what Islam means here and now. That meaning can be found in the life and actions of Muhammed, which at very least represents a continuation of the spread of Islam with its implication of physical Jihad. Islamic State Caliphate simply removes the pretence that Islam means peace. Islamic State Caliphate is pax Islamica.

Political Civilisation cannot change Islam.

For Muslims who really do want a peaceful coexistence in the UK, and I suspect there are many, this reality of Muhammed’s life is simply overlooked and sublimated by a heretical Christ of Islam. Muhammed is replaced in present conscience by a cultural understanding that Christ was a man of peace – who is represented in Islam as Isa al’Masih. In that reality of mysticism, it is Christ who gives Islam its power to be called a religion of peace in Western minds, and not Muhammed. That same subconscious effect in the minds of many Muslims may well translate into a belief that Muhammed was a man of true peace – by all others – where an ability to know Islam through the life of Muhammed is abrogated – and a requirement under the Declaration of Human Rights to guarantee freedom of religious expression and political expression more suits, Islam, than it suits Western civilisation itself.

In the experience of Muhammed’s own life, and therefore in Islam itself, the only possibility that Muhammed could be called a man of true peace – as Christ was a man of true peace, would be when the host nation becomes inclined to Islam – whether by choice or else by political imbecility. That would be no peace at all. It would be Islam. And regardless of any such peace, the Islamic source texts of the Qur’an, Sira and a’Hadith would always be waiting in some men’s minds – with their ambition to make good Muhammed’s own Greater Jihad with its struggle for the establishment of Islam in the face of contempt, and its great effort to impose Islam and Shari’ah. When that comes to their conscious minds, it will be the Lesser Jihad with is doctrinal subjugation and physical oppression that will triumph. When Islam asserts itself as a religion of peace, it is sublimating true Christ onto others, through the Islamic Jesus. The effect of that is a political demand to receive the whole of Islam because Islam loves Jesus. In short, it is the Jihad of deception. In the homogeneity of a historical reality within the UK and Canada, Islam is afforded a benefit of claiming respect for Jesus – for which we are required to respect Muhammed.

59.3% of the population in the UK 2011 Census voluntarily identified themselves with the Christian Faith (66% in Canada). No doubt in a civilised society we can broadly respect others’ beliefs. However, Islam is intent on the Islamisation of Britain and Canada and one of the most potent deceptions in that ambition concerns the claim that Islam respects Jesus. It is a falsehood – theologically and politically. Islam requires us to yield up Christianity. If we do that, then we will have yielded up the very man who’s life and meaning shaped the nation that gives us our civility. Anyone claiming otherwise is denying Muhammed, who declared himself the final arbiter of mankind before God.

It is Muhammed, of Islam who determines the meaning of Islam – it is the canonical books of Islam that determine what Islam means politically, because it is the canonical books of Islam that define all non Muslims as Kafir. What that means, set in context of the Shari’ah, is of singular importance when we realise that the Shari’ah embodies the entire ambition of Islam, both politically and spiritually.

We have a very serious problem in the UK, because Islam has become a protected ideology. That protection is grounded in what that means in the lives of law abiding Muslims. It has nothing whatever to do with Islam, however, as it is. The detail of unravelling how that has happened is significant. What we will find, when we begin to do that work publicly, is that Islam, as we are required to receive it, in terms such as Islam is a religion of peace, and Islam is a great faith, takes its shape from the former British Empire, and has almost nothing to do with Islam, as defined and evidenced in the life of Muhammed, including much of Islam, in the former British Empire. How the law abiding intentions of even the majority of Muslims, defined in their lawful actions, serves to cover Islam, is key to understanding Islam in Britain.